Dissecting the E10 case: https://kisskh.at/discussions/780258-esquire/144746-dissecting-the-e10-case
№2. The murder / accident
Was it murder? Was it an accident?
How many of us can truly be honest and admit that you viewed it as murder? I did. I even asked, "That's their new case? Are they going to take it? How are they going to cover it up? Is this finally an example of the ugly side of being a lawyer?"
However, to everyone's surprise, there was more to the case than meets the eye, and I think we can all agree that the decision was very fair.
👉🏽 It wasn't a single case, rather there were two: attempted murder and road accident. It was fairly treated as such.
Since the victim did not die, it was attempted murder. And the autopsy showed the victim died because of the road accident, she only had to pay for that crime and her being neglectful by not looking at the road while driving.
They did not frame it as "revenge". Why? Because that will make their argument weaker.
They did not even point out that the primary perpetrator of severe bullying was the victim, they did mention it but it was all but in passing, the focus was never on that. Why? Again, the case must never be framed as revenge, otherwise the road accident can be twisted as part of the plan and they can accuse her that she's lying about not looking forward while driving.
As the ML said, it was balanced logic and emotion. The FL successfully controlled the floor and kept everyone from thinking otherwise.
I pride myself that I'm good at logical arguments, LOL, people around me during my school years kept telling me to become a lawyer. But, the FL? Or, whoever wrote the script? I cannot do that. That was on a whole different level. And this why I saw the beauty of her style. If ever we will need one and she's real, we'll pick her even if we must pay a fortune.
Dissecting the E10 case: https://kisskh.at/discussions/780258-esquire/144746-dissecting-the-e10-case
There are so many things to unpack in E10 but for me the most important one here is the case, similar to E09 were it was also the case.
The E10 case is very meaningful. It informs us how the human mind is vulnerable to many factors which can lead to actions we may regret later.
№1. Let's begin with the FL's mother
She was right that at the time, it was the best decision she could ever make. For sure one reason was the school ranking, but her mother didn't appear to be that kind of person. It did influence her decision, but what really topped and mattered to her were:
1.a. She was fighting against a formidable foe: the bully's father. 1.b. Their bully daugher will definitely targer the FL.
I'm sure it is safe to say that no family member, most especially immediate family, will want to take a huge risk in such a scenario. Even if they win, we cannot predict what other things might happen. They could get back to her later when they least expect it. Or, ask someone to send the white truck of death.
The FL's mother had no choice but to drop her threats to keep the FL safe from that bully family. No doubt at the time she secretly hope that they'll reap what they sowed. 25 years later, they did, and in a very ugly way, as sad as it may be.
I mean, I'm not judging anyone. I like plot and feels.That said, the case in episode 9 was stellar. I really liked…
Yep! Exactly! There's a lot to learn and ponder upon about E09 case that can help us individually and as a society. But alas, many are focused on superficial things.
I mean, it's not like the other cases where it served the dynamics of the characters. E09 case isn't about the characters this time, it's about humanity and how each individual handle what seems to be a contradiction between law/oath and personal beliefs/principles.
The consistent negative feedback and reasons stated.
This is what happens when you set a high expectation and don't deliver. It is much better to set a low expectation and surprise the audience to the point people starts to recommend it (word-of-mouth).
In a way today's case can be seen as a silent protest against the current "lax" law pertaining to child…
It's not really a question of "right to play god". Touching kids is a universal big no. Even hitmen follow that unwritten rule. In prison, convicted kid rapists are often separated because everyone knows the other inmates will find opportunities to kill a kid rapist.
We don't need state laws or religion to tell us that those who crossed this line deserves the death penalty. I'll say that kid rapists ranks 1st to 10th in death penalty priority.
Just no.
Rather, the show is about how people will deal with the situation.
1. The doctor who "saved" the rapist did admit he did something but he still miraculously survived that day. He told her that he knew his condition then and still did what was dangerous for him, he just happened to survived. His choice was to play it safe because after all, Oath.
2. The NFS/autopsy doctors. They know they cannot lie. So what did they do? They gave a hundred times more effort to the autopsy case so they can find reasons to protect the Doctor and prevent any possibility of giving "justice" to the rapist even in death.
3. The prosecutor head. He gave the case to the prosecutor who handled the little girl's case. Why? Because he knew that prosecutor knows what to do. They may not be in agreement all the time but this particular case, they both understood what's at stake.
4. The prosecutor himself. He already have a particular conclusion in mind. But he still need to play it safe. So he did what he can. We can say he used the defense as "second opinion". When the defense came up with an exact brief and conclusion as the NIS, it was a very solid proof.
5. The rapist's family getting a new attorney. The case was assigned to someone who they knew would fail in it.
All of them. Every step of the way. They handled things discreetly. I think that's the point vs the outburst of the Doctor the first time she saw the rapist.
Was the doctor lucky? I agree with the FL, she was not lucky. Everyone simply secretly aligned that the kid rapist doesn't deserve any justice. Everyone's objective was that. The Doctor was just side an after effect. In fact, no one cares if the Doctor was innocent or guilty. The kid rapist crossed the line, the only thing he deserves is to die.
Raping a kid? Sexual harassment of a kid? We don't need religion or state laws to tell us that the suspect deserves to die, right there and then. But at the same time, we shouldn't make an outburst destroying ourselves in the process (which the doctor almost got herself into).
It's not "playing god", it's just the universal truth.
Though everything was already predictable the moment they revealed the way the prosecutor talked, it was still a blast as if you didn't figure out the rest of the episodes's plot.
Why?
There are two things one should never ever cross: (but I'll only mention 1) №1: young children and those with mental conditions; or put it another way, those who have not yet crossed their age of accountability or have dimished mental capacity (and related)
You just simply don't cross the line. If you do, the entire world, even your fellow criminals, will shun you. (That's why he was stabbed, and it's true, criminals will find opportunities to kill anyone in prison who are guilty of touching kids, hence those guilty are usually separated.)
LOL. Even assassins/hit men follow the same unwritten rule: no kids.
You just don't, period.
Hence, it was very touching how everyone worked and contributed in their own little ways to ensure—without resorting to lying and inventing—that the criminal won't get any justice even after his death, and save the doctor.
As far as everyone cared, it didn't matter if the Doctor was innocent or guilty, the criminal in this case must never get justice even in death. So, without resorting to lies, everyone did everything to find ways to achieve a certain outcome.
Like, f***, we don't need religion to tell us that touching kids is an unforgivable sin. If there's a ranking of which sin deserves death penalty, this ranks 1st to 10th.
idk why is everyone so mad ??? I kinda love the drama ?? I mean I only watched the ep 1 but I look good like why…
Giving feedback ≠ mad.
Is it not allowed to state facts like bad fight choreography and editing? They have a good story but the execution so far is not doing the story justice.
1 
Was it murder? Was it an accident?
How many of us can truly be honest and admit that you viewed it as murder? I did. I even asked, "That's their new case? Are they going to take it? How are they going to cover it up? Is this finally an example of the ugly side of being a lawyer?"
However, to everyone's surprise, there was more to the case than meets the eye, and I think we can all agree that the decision was very fair.
👉🏽 It wasn't a single case, rather there were two: attempted murder and road accident. It was fairly treated as such.
Since the victim did not die, it was attempted murder. And the autopsy showed the victim died because of the road accident, she only had to pay for that crime and her being neglectful by not looking at the road while driving.
They did not frame it as "revenge". Why? Because that will make their argument weaker.
They did not even point out that the primary perpetrator of severe bullying was the victim, they did mention it but it was all but in passing, the focus was never on that. Why? Again, the case must never be framed as revenge, otherwise the road accident can be twisted as part of the plan and they can accuse her that she's lying about not looking forward while driving.
As the ML said, it was balanced logic and emotion. The FL successfully controlled the floor and kept everyone from thinking otherwise.
I pride myself that I'm good at logical arguments, LOL, people around me during my school years kept telling me to become a lawyer. But, the FL? Or, whoever wrote the script? I cannot do that. That was on a whole different level. And this why I saw the beauty of her style. If ever we will need one and she's real, we'll pick her even if we must pay a fortune.
The E10 case is very meaningful. It informs us how the human mind is vulnerable to many factors which can lead to actions we may regret later.
№1. Let's begin with the FL's mother
She was right that at the time, it was the best decision she could ever make. For sure one reason was the school ranking, but her mother didn't appear to be that kind of person. It did influence her decision, but what really topped and mattered to her were:
1.a. She was fighting against a formidable foe: the bully's father.
1.b. Their bully daugher will definitely targer the FL.
I'm sure it is safe to say that no family member, most especially immediate family, will want to take a huge risk in such a scenario. Even if they win, we cannot predict what other things might happen. They could get back to her later when they least expect it. Or, ask someone to send the white truck of death.
The FL's mother had no choice but to drop her threats to keep the FL safe from that bully family. No doubt at the time she secretly hope that they'll reap what they sowed. 25 years later, they did, and in a very ugly way, as sad as it may be.
I mean, it's not like the other cases where it served the dynamics of the characters. E09 case isn't about the characters this time, it's about humanity and how each individual handle what seems to be a contradiction between law/oath and personal beliefs/principles.
It's too important to be ignored. 😟
Eating at Subway.
🤪
This is what happens when you set a high expectation and don't deliver. It is much better to set a low expectation and surprise the audience to the point people starts to recommend it (word-of-mouth).
Ancient past:
Pig: I think this thing called Kopiko can wake them up.
Tiger: *growl*
Dragon: No, it's a good idea. Kopiko will wake them from their eternal slumber.
Judge: Counsel, stop blah blah blah. Here, take some Kopiko and calm yourself.
We don't need state laws or religion to tell us that those who crossed this line deserves the death penalty. I'll say that kid rapists ranks 1st to 10th in death penalty priority.
Just no.
Rather, the show is about how people will deal with the situation.
1. The doctor who "saved" the rapist did admit he did something but he still miraculously survived that day. He told her that he knew his condition then and still did what was dangerous for him, he just happened to survived. His choice was to play it safe because after all, Oath.
2. The NFS/autopsy doctors. They know they cannot lie. So what did they do? They gave a hundred times more effort to the autopsy case so they can find reasons to protect the Doctor and prevent any possibility of giving "justice" to the rapist even in death.
3. The prosecutor head. He gave the case to the prosecutor who handled the little girl's case. Why? Because he knew that prosecutor knows what to do. They may not be in agreement all the time but this particular case, they both understood what's at stake.
4. The prosecutor himself. He already have a particular conclusion in mind. But he still need to play it safe. So he did what he can. We can say he used the defense as "second opinion". When the defense came up with an exact brief and conclusion as the NIS, it was a very solid proof.
5. The rapist's family getting a new attorney. The case was assigned to someone who they knew would fail in it.
All of them. Every step of the way. They handled things discreetly. I think that's the point vs the outburst of the Doctor the first time she saw the rapist.
Was the doctor lucky? I agree with the FL, she was not lucky. Everyone simply secretly aligned that the kid rapist doesn't deserve any justice. Everyone's objective was that. The Doctor was just side an after effect. In fact, no one cares if the Doctor was innocent or guilty. The kid rapist crossed the line, the only thing he deserves is to die.
Raping a kid? Sexual harassment of a kid? We don't need religion or state laws to tell us that the suspect deserves to die, right there and then. But at the same time, we shouldn't make an outburst destroying ourselves in the process (which the doctor almost got herself into).
It's not "playing god", it's just the universal truth.
Though everything was already predictable the moment they revealed the way the prosecutor talked, it was still a blast as if you didn't figure out the rest of the episodes's plot.
Why?
There are two things one should never ever cross: (but I'll only mention 1)
№1: young children and those with mental conditions; or put it another way, those who have not yet crossed their age of accountability or have dimished mental capacity (and related)
You just simply don't cross the line. If you do, the entire world, even your fellow criminals, will shun you. (That's why he was stabbed, and it's true, criminals will find opportunities to kill anyone in prison who are guilty of touching kids, hence those guilty are usually separated.)
LOL. Even assassins/hit men follow the same unwritten rule: no kids.
You just don't, period.
Hence, it was very touching how everyone worked and contributed in their own little ways to ensure—without resorting to lying and inventing—that the criminal won't get any justice even after his death, and save the doctor.
As far as everyone cared, it didn't matter if the Doctor was innocent or guilty, the criminal in this case must never get justice even in death. So, without resorting to lies, everyone did everything to find ways to achieve a certain outcome.
Like, f***, we don't need religion to tell us that touching kids is an unforgivable sin. If there's a ranking of which sin deserves death penalty, this ranks 1st to 10th.
The fallen angel, "crow" is not counted. Also, their "father" is not counted either, he's just their caretaker.
It needs good execution so it can give justice to the story.
Is it not allowed to state facts like bad fight choreography and editing? They have a good story but the execution so far is not doing the story justice.
That is being "mad" already?